get_user_followers_you_know

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but only states the basic action. It doesn't mention pagination behavior (implied by 'cursor' parameter), rate limits, authentication needs, or what the output contains (though an output schema exists). This leaves significant gaps for a tool that likely involves data retrieval and user context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary words. Every part of the sentence contributes directly to understanding the tool's function, making it optimally concise.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (retrieving relational data), no annotations, and 0% schema coverage, the description is incomplete—it lacks parameter details and behavioral context. However, the existence of an output schema mitigates the need to describe return values, keeping it at a minimal viable level.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate but adds no parameter information. It doesn't explain what 'user_id' represents, how 'count' affects results, or what 'cursor' is for pagination. This is inadequate given three parameters with no schema descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Retrieves') and resource ('common followers between you and a user'), making it immediately understandable. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_user_followers' by specifying the 'common' relationship, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with all similar tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_user_followers' or 'get_user_following'. It lacks context about prerequisites, such as authentication requirements or when this tool is preferred over other follower-related tools in the sibling list.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.